In this article we attempt to summarize the fi ndings from a number of studies on the asymmetric dominance effect (attraction effect, decoy effect). This is a phenomenon where popularity of one of the decision alternatives increases when accompanied by a similar but inferior (dominated) option. Scientifi c research and numerous observational studies show that the attraction effect occurs in various fi elds, incl. the economy, politics, law or medicine. In the literature there are many ambiguities and contradictory theories about, for example, its determinants in the light of the dual-systems theory. It is not ntirely clear whether the phenomenon of asymmetric domination is the result of a refl ective, deliberative way of information processing or of quick and intuitive thinking. There is also no unequivocal answer to the question whether this effect is a manifestation of human irrationality or whether it is an adaptive and effective decision-making strategy in conditions of uncertainty and information noise. The article contains a broad overview of research on the effect of asymmetric dominance among people and animals. The hanges in the susceptibility to this effect across the lifespan are analysed. Finally, the paper discusses using the asymmetric dominance effect to achieve socially desirable goals as described in the theory of libertarian paternalism.

The goal of the present paper is to review recent theoretical models and empirical studies on the role of numeracy (i.e., cognitive ability in processing numerical information) in decision making under risk and uncertainty. The research conducted in the last decade points that numeracy is the most robust predictor of making good decisions, which predictions are independent of other psychological constructs or cognitive abilities (such as fluid Intelligence or cognitive reflection). The pivotal role of numeracy has been described in at least three theoretical models: Fuzzy-Trace Theory, Skilled Decision Theory, and Multiple Numeric Competencies model. Furthermore, the results of numerous research indicate that better decisions made by people with high numeracy are underpinned by various psychological mechanisms of the cognitive, motivational, and affective nature. Findings related to the performance of people with high and low numeracy served to develop both immediate (e.g., visual aids or an experience-based format of risk communication) and long-term (e.g.,cognitive training) methods of improving the decision-making process. Based on these decision aids, we can effectively support people with low numeracy in an accurate risk assessment, risk comprehension, and making better decisions.

The article examines the decision-making components of Jane Austen’s six major novels as reconstructed in Michael Chwe’s book and his argument that Austen was a precursor of game theory. In her novels, Austen describes an abundance of strategic situations in the mating process within the British higher classes. Social constraints made mating within this world a tough game due to harsh punishments for failure, especially for women, and severe limitation on signaling interest or sympathy. Austen cleverly investigates this environment and reconstructs many aspects of strategic behavior that have their counterparts in formal concepts of game and decision theory. While she hasn’t made contributions to theory per se, she deserves being named a precursor of applied strategic thinking and an expert on a particular strategically sophisticated social environment.

This paper revisits one of the most debated tales from the Old Testament, Jacob’s deception of his father Isaac, and models it in the framework of a Bayesian game. Solving for the equilibrium that occurs in the Torah reveals what conditions must hold for biblical characters to be willing to make the decisions that they make. The paper also examines how the protagonists’ decisions would have changed if they had held different values. The analysis sheds light on which interpretations of the biblical story hold the most weight when its characters maintain consistent beliefs and act upon them in a sequentially rational manner.

Legal Probabilism is the view that mathematics, and probability theory in particular, can be used to explicate the standard of legal decisions. While probabilistic tools are sometimes used in courtrooms, the construction of a general model of evidence evaluation remains a challenge. Conceptual difficulties facing Legal Probabilism include the difficulty about conjunction, the difficulty about corroboration and the gatecrasher paradox. These problems need to be addressed before we construct a general model. In this survey we discuss the three difficulties and present some theories proposed as their solutions.Małgorzata Stefaniak, Rafał Urbaniak

The paper presents the literature review on judicial decision making process and focuses particularly on sentencing decisions. The first paragraph has been devoted to legal directives that should inform the judge decisions about the decision weight of particular perpetrator/offence features in sentencing. Whatsoever the system of sentencing is immensely complicated even for judges: the definitions of the above mentioned directives seem to be fundamentally contentious and it remains obscure how much weight is and should be given to each of them. This situation makes different judges give different sentences for the same offence. Furthermore, the judicial practice reveals some turns-out-to-be aggravating factors that should never be taken into consideration in sentencing. Thus, in the same paragraph, the authors present methods which may help to identify the true factors and their weight in sentencing process. In the second paragraph the authors discuss the influence of judges’ cognitive dispositions (deeply rooted in psychophysics as well in heuristic reasoning) on sentencing decisions. The roles of Weber’s law and anchoring heuristic have been highlighted. Finally a discussion follows on the influence of dispositions rooted in Prospect Theory on parties’ propensity toward reaching a compromise even before the trial.

Social choice theory is essentially about the constraints upon effective mechanisms for implementing desirable states of a society or a group, given the preferences and utilities of its members. Social choice theory is also, and much more generally, a conceptual examination of normative theories of society – theories that characterize what it is for state of affairs to be better from the social point of view. Social choice methods have different aims, for example democratic decision-making, epistemic decision-making, respecting individual rights of persons and groups, just distribution of goods. They are justified by the sets of postulates, which represent different basic social values.

The article is a short review of interpretation of probability and its significance for risky decisions. It especially deals with a concept of subjective probability and decision weights introduced by the prospect theory. While dealing with both subjective deviation from objective probabilities as well as subjective probability transformation as probability weighting function it was observed that people treat low probabilities differently. In both situations people tend to overestimate rare events. Recently it has been said, that in the decision based on direct observations of frequency of events, overestimation is much weaker.